Welcome everyone.

It is April twenty first, twenty twenty six, and Mr.

Manager, you are ready to get us informed about a data centers and budget, correct?

Yes, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So I'm going to immediately turn it over to uh Jimmy McNamara in the planning department and also Stephen Wright in economic development to talk about some of the issues related to data centers.

Good evening, everyone, and appreciate your time this uh this evening.

Uh with me today I also have Alyssa Neal, who is our subject matter expert and is handling the text amendment change for data centers, which we'll be going over here through the presentation.

So last year the city did receive a request uh for a piece of property for the purpose of constructing uh a data center.

The public hearing for that item resulted in hours of discussion.

Ultimately, the rezoning was denied.

And shortly thereafter, in the fall of 2025 at City City Council retreat, we again discussed the benefits and challenges of data centers.

So on January 13th of this year, City Council adopted an initiating resolution directing staff to begin work on preparing amendments to the zoning ordinance to address data centers.

So we will be giving you an overall update on the progress towards that goal.

We'll explain the existing status of data centers within the city and where we are currently where they are currently permitted.

Um we'll talk about our approach to this text amendment, preliminary considerations for standards, and then discuss next steps.

And finally, uh Stephen will take things over and we'll go over a proposed tax adjustment from uh from economic development.

SARS zoning ordinance currently uses the standard industrial classification manual to classify uses, and data centers as they exist today were not necessarily contemplated in the 1987 uh update when the manual was developed.

Uh the existing code that this use falls under is 7374, which is computer processing and data preparation and processing services.

Uh similar use uh that we see this is is is an office environment or a call center, not necessarily the data centers that we see today.

The SIC code is a permitted use in business, industrial, and office zoning districts, uh, meaning that this is a by-right use without the need for any city council approval in these locations.

It is also permitted by right in the Great Bridge and South Norfolk uh overlay districts.

When looking at properties with this zoning classification, that means there are over 27,000 residentially zoned properties that lie within 500 feet of a property that permits a data center by right.

At the time of the retreat, we recommended several actions to consider.

First, make these a conditional use on property zone industrial or within the Fentrest Airfield Overlay District.

Next, we recommended the adoption of a policy similar to that of the solar energy policy that would guide staff recommendations when applications were being considered.

And finally, we recommend that data centers continue to be permitted by right on the Coastal Virginia Commerce Park.

The development criteria for this park has extensive requirements already in place that would also apply to data centers.

Our approach to this topic was is extensive.

We knew that it was absolutely critical to engage with stakeholders who are both pro and anti-data centers.

We knew that we had to engage with those in tangential uh industries like Dominion Energy and the Virginia Natural Gas.

We knew that we had to work with other city departments to make sure that their concerns were addressed.

We also knew that state code is constantly changing and that we need to incorporate the latest changes uh as adopted by the General Assembly.

And we know that there's been a lot of work that's been done regarding data center regulations across the state.

We set out to engage with expert localities and to review applicable ordinances from across the state.

When looking for expert localities, we didn't have to go far.

In February of this year, we load up a van full of city departments, uh, department uh representatives and planning commissioners and headed up to Prince William County.

We were able to sit down with a variety of their experts and staff and discuss the nuts and bolts of their regulations.

We heard what they did well, uh, what they needed to make where they needed to make changes and lessons learned along the way.

We are also able to go on a site tour where we saw both newer and older model data centers.

We saw some under construction, we saw single and multi-story, and we saw many, many substations.

We saw buildings that look like office buildings.

We stopped at one particular data center and got out to listen to the noise generated uh by that data center.

This one was located less than 200 feet away from multifamily residential units.

Try as we did, we did heard no noise at all.

At one point, I asked if the data center was actually operational yet.

From an audible noise perspective, no noise was observable.

That being said, we also know that much of the noises generated from these facilities is a noise that you cannot, quote, feel, but you he that you feel rather than hear.

We also stopped in another neighborhood for a separate facility that where the county has received several complaints.

This facility is located approximately 500 feet away from residences.

During that stop, we observed from the right of way the slightest sound sounded like an HVAC unit to be heard in the very distant and in the very far distant.

But it was much lower than any of the ambient noise that we heard from the street or any of the adjacent HVAC units from the neighbors' homes that were nearby.

We'll talk more about noise regulations later on in the presentation.

I would like to shift gears now and talk about our stakeholder committee.

Having a balanced conversation is critical to policy development.

We wanted to form a committee that would vet a variety of issues related to data centers.

We selected citizens who were concerned about the previous study center application.

We have two plan commission members, and we also have representatives from Dominion Energy, the Chesapeake Alliance, and the South Side Network Authority.

This committee has met several times and has provided exceptional uh input for the consideration as we vet uh requirements.

Our internal stakeholder committee is extensive and has provided great input as well from an operational and administrative perspective.

Folks like FIRE have received extensive information from other localities are in processes of adapting that information for our use.

Localities across the state have also adopted regulations over the past couple of years.

We have extensively reviewed each of these ordinances for information that would be helpful in our circumstances.

While not all new state legislation applies directly to regulation of data centers, we also reviewed all legislation to ensure that our proposed ordinance is consistent with all changes passed by the General Assembly.

After all these reviews, several major themes have arisen.

Each of these themes is being vetted with our stakeholder committee that is composed of both citizens and those in the industry.

Alyssa is going to go over a high-level preliminary considerations for each of these themes.

And we must note that these are not final and they're still being reviewed and commented on by our committee, but we wanted to give you a status update of where we stand currently.

Thank you, Director McDemara, and good afternoon, Mayor West and members of City Council.

What I'll walk through now are the major themes that consistently emerge through our conversations and research into data center development.

These themes include defining principal and ancillary uses and identifying appropriate zoning districts, water use, power supply, generators, public outreach, visual impacts, fire and life safety, buffer yards and setbacks, lighting, architectural standards, noise, and construction mitigation.

The next few slides, including this one, will explore several of these themes in greater detail.

So starting with water use, discussions have focused on the importance of connecting to a public water system, discouraging the use of private groundwater wells for any purpose, and implementing water conservation strategies such as rainwater harvesting and closed loop cooling systems.

Turning now to power supply, discussions have emphasized the importance of early coordination with the electric utility, specifically requiring a letter from the electric utility provider, confirming availability and access to a substation and transmission infrastructure with sufficient capacity to serve the proposed data center, along with an estimate of anticipated energy demand and voltage requirements at full build out.

Moving from primary power to backup systems, another key theme relates to backup generators, specifically limiting testing hours, providing appropriate screening from residential areas and public rights of way, addressing noise through studies and potential mitigation measures, which can be, which we'll be further discussed later on.

Beyond infrastructure, we also heard the importance of public outreach and transparency.

While we can't require public outreach, we can strongly encourage it within our policy document and provide some parameters such as recommending applicants hold two public meetings and notify all property owners within a certain distance of the project.

The purpose of this engagement would be to inform, answer questions, and allow residents the opportunity to provide feedback.

And like all discretionary land use applications, we would provide a summary of this outreach within a staff report for a conditional use permit.

Several key themes focused on how data center facilities integrate into the surrounding community.

So one of these things would be a view shed analysis with at least four vantage points, which can help show whether buffers are effective both initially and as they mature over time.

The next key theme relates to fire and life safety standards.

The Chesapeake Fire Department is working on preparing criteria for this section, which would include things like two points of access, an emergency response plan, as they would require for battery energy storage, and utilizing information from a data center response manual used by other localities.

In terms of buffer yards and setbags, what we found is that there is no one-size-fits-all approach.

So we're looking at establishing baseline standards while also allowing flexibility for City Council to make adjustments through the conditional use permit process, similar to what we would do with battery energy storage.

The next key theme is lighting, which can create nuisance impacts if it isn't managed well.

We're looking at encouraging dark sky principles such as cutoff fixtures and warmer color lighting in order to minimize light spill and reduce impacts on surrounding properties.

Building on that focus on visual and design consideration, another key theme relates to architectural standards.

Here we're looking at elements such as variation in wall planes, screening of rooftop mechanical equipment, thoughtful security fencing, so that we can avoid extensive chain link fences with barbed wire on top, and incorporating energy efficient building design.

So the last key theme is noise, and here we are considering measures such as limiting generator testing to weekday daytime hours limit with limitations on weekly runtime.

We are also looking at both A-weighted decibel and C-weighted decibel standards.

A-weighted, which is the standard currently found in the city's noise ordinance, reflects the way sound is typically perceived by the human ear, while C-weighted captures lower frequency noises, including the low-level hum that can be associated with data centers.

In addition, we are evaluating the use of octave band analysis to better understand noise across different frequencies.

And finally, we are considering requiring sound analysis both prior to construction and after a facility becomes operational.

And that concludes the major themes we identified through our research and stakeholder engagement.

And I will turn it back over to you, Director McNamara.

So I want to touch really quick on noise.

So this was something that was very prevalent during our considerations last time, and it's certainly a consideration that many of the Northern Virginia localities have brought up time and time again.

In particular, it uh is a challenge when trying to enforce uh these these noise provisions.

Uh it really takes a lot of equipment and expertise in order to really uh get down to uh the enforcement of of these uh these octave bands.

So just want to be you know eyes wide open as we're considering this.

If we are looking to mitigate this, it's going to there are going to be some costs associated with with enforcement.

In particular, that's going to take a certain amount of equipment to to measure these lower octave bands.

And then also from an expertise standpoint, we are going to need to uh you know potentially either hire or or contract with uh audio experts who will be able to testify in court at the time if there is enforcement necessary for for these types of uses.

So just want to be eyes wide open as we look at uh putting these standards into place that there is going to be some some uh some costs associated with with enforcing this.

With regards to next steps, uh you know, we are uh as we stated earlier reviewing preliminary recommendations with our stakeholder groups and getting comments on those.

Uh we will uh look at amending the of course with the amending the zoning ordinance to make these a conditional use in uh the industrial uh zoning classifications and the Fentrish Airfield Overlay District.

Uh we're we're hard at work with writing a policy.

And I do want to bring up the fact that right now we have an initiating resolution that's directing us to amend the zoning ordinance.

We will also be looking to bring forward an initiating resolution for your consideration, which would then amend the comprehensive plan to adopt the policy that would go uh hand in hand with the with the zoning text amendment change.

We'll then move on to the Planning Commission public hearing uh and then which will be followed up by the City Council public hearing.

As always, we are vetting everything that we can to make sure that we're bringing a policy and a text amendment before you that is ready for consideration.

We appreciate all the help that has uh come from our our stakeholder committees, and we look forward uh to continuing to engage with them.

So at this time, I'm gonna turn things over to Steven uh uh to discuss the data center tax uh rate adjustment.

Thank you, Jimmy.

Um mayor, members of council, um I'm Stephen Wright, Director of Economic Development.

Um you've heard a lot uh from the planning staff regarding uh a lot of different considerations for data centers uh and what their impacts could be in Chesapeake.

Um we want to talk about the financial impact, though.

Um, because as a part of this process, we thought it was appropriate to look at the tax rates associated with data centers because many times these facilities are extremely large, uh.

And in some communities in Northern Virginia, data centers are some of the largest taxpayers in those communities.

So it's important that we have a good understanding as to how the tax rate and how we could see tax revenue from these facilities, how we would do it and what the potential impacts would be.

Um, after careful consideration of a variety of different factors, uh staff is recommending that an ordinance, uh an amendment to the ordinance that will change the or increase the tax rate from 40 cents per 100 dollars of assessed value.

We would like to increase that to $2 per 100 of assessed value.

Um at $2 per hundred, um, we would still be lower than the state average within the Commonwealth, the State average is apparent as about $3.09 per hundred of assessed value, and we would be considerably less than the communities in Northern Virginia.

I want to share some information with you about kind of why we came to this conclusion or this recommendation, I'll say.

Um and to do that, we want to look back.

Uh back in 2018, um there was a lot of data center development happening in Northern Virginia.

Uh when you look at uh how Virginia was coming out of the recession from several years earlier, um, data centers were really driving the Virginia economy.

And for that reason, a lot of localities, particularly in Hampton Roads, wanted to get a piece of that revenue.

To that end, uh many localities reduced their tax rates in an effort to attract data centers to their communities.

And Chesapeake was no exception.

Previously, the tax rate on data centers was $4.08 per hundred of assessed value.

And just to be clear, the city defines assessed value of at 20 percent of original cost.

So back in 2018, the tax rate was lowered from $4.08 per hundred to 40 cents per 100 dollars of value.

And again, that was done to try and get data centers to consider coming to Hampton Roads and coming to Chesapeake.

Data center developers had not considered this area for a variety of different reasons, uh, most of which were environmental, fear of uh natural disasters and the impact that it would have on their facilities.

So even after that significant reduction, we did not see uh any data centers come to the city.

Now, when considering the recommendation to increase the tax rate from what is now 40 cents to $2, there are three important considerations to consider.

Number one, uh local taxation of data centers really taxation is really not a driving location factor for data centers at this time.

Um I think uh Jimmy mentioned the importance of power.

Most data centers are going where the power is located.

Uh and because there is limited power in Northern Virginia, they are starting to look south into central Virginia, and yes, even into Chesapeake.

So we do not believe that raising the tax rate from 40 cents to $2 uh will have an adverse impact on the city's ability to attract the data center.

Secondly, um there are no operations that would be impacted by this increased tax rate in the city right now.

Okay.

So there's no business that might have a small uh server room.

That business would not be impacted by this increase uh tax rate.

To be clear though, and and to be transparent, staff has had conversations with interested data center developers.

And in the interest of transparency, we have told all of them that there is a possibility that the current tax rate could be increased in the near future.

But certainly we told them that that was something that City Council would have to approve.

Lastly, there are several other localities that have recently increased their tax rates.

Well, over the past two to three years, many of those same communities have increased their tax rates to get a better yield if they are successful in attracting the data center.

This next slide illustrates where most of the data center communities, if you will, uh under consideration where they are from a tax perspective.

Again, you can see that all of them, with the exception of one, um have really thought about or in the process of increasing their tax rate.

I will tell you Chesterfield County is probably the outlier.

Um about seven years, Chesterfield County made the decision to lower their tax rate by about 86 percent.

In doing so, they are now at 24 cents per hundred.

Uh and to their credit, they have been successful in attracting some very large data center projects to their community.

Uh but by and large, um the tax rates from the $2 to $3 to $4 per hundred, uh, those tax rates have not had an adverse impact, uh, have not reduced the amount of interest that data centers have in coming to Virginia.

Again, I want to stress that this is only a a staff recommendation.

Um it is our intent for you to receive additional information regarding the tax rate, uh, a more detailed staff report will be provided to you uh as you consider the FY or fiscal year 20 2027 budget.

I think that's all I have.

Anyone have any questions or comments they'd like to make?

Uh Mr.

Manager, do you want to follow up or thank you, Smaron?

I I know I walked in late, so I apologize for that.

But uh on the water usage, do we have a different designation for what data centers will be under?

You know, we how we have the tier system.

Will they be under their own separate designation?

Because I imagine they're going to hit that highest tier every time.

Or is that something worth considering doing?

So I'm certainly not the Department of Public Utilities, but uh I I I in our conversations, they are certainly on our stakeholder committees.

And they do understand that these are going to be high water users and they would be subject to that higher rate.

Um, but I don't think at this point in time anything has been mentioned about creating a separate category for data centers as of yet.

Okay.

Would it be advantageous once it gets to a certain level that we create a higher because I think we expect there to be low water usage for just your average consumer commercial business, but data centers use a significant amount of water for their uh practices, so maybe it's worth looking into an even higher designation if they hit that, then it goes even more.

You are exactly correct.

So we did as an incentive for water-intensive industries for major economic development purposes, we did have an incentivized rate.

However, data centers are of completely different animals, so that is as part of the calculus we will look at as we bring recommendations.

But I appreciate you bringing that up.

Uh Dr.

King?

Yeah.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I just wanted to ask, can you speak to what kinds of water conservation methods we are talking about?

Mostly um using a closed loop system so that they're not uh drawing more water in, they're using the water that's that's there, and then the rainwater harvesting, which really wouldn't help their um internal cooling needs, but could help with something like um conserving water for their landscaping requirements and being able to maintain the plant material.

Okay.

And one last question.

Can you tell me how we arrived at the tax rate increase?

Why two dollars?

One of the reasons I'm sorry, one of the reasons that we settled on two dollars is because we wanted to be competitive across the Commonwealth.

Uh we've had conversations with other localities in Hampton Roads, and we believe that they are making plans to raise their tax rates as well.

But we thought that $2 was a good midpoint to at least start at that it would not adversely impact our ability to attract additional data centers.

I'll add on to that a little bit.

And at our current tax rate, it would not be worth it for us to do a data center project.

We'd be chewing up prime industrial or commercial land for a data center with potentially significant impacts with very little revenue generation for the community at $2.

That's a spot where we think we could remain very competitive in this space.

Hampton Roads does have some challenges because of the perception around climate risk.

So we we do have that challenge.

But over time, taxation has become less of a material issue is as Stephen mentioned.

So we think $2 is sort of that spot that keeps us competitive today and into the future with what we see happening here in the region and statewide, but also not be a barrier to entry if if data centers do choose to locate here.

Thank you.

One last quick question.

We already have areas that are zoned for these data centers.

Why are we looking for conditional use permits versus trying to build them here in these areas that are already designated?

So right now we are extremely exposed with the amount of property that can already have a data center on it by right without any mitigation.

So what we're considering, you know, with with this text amendment is actually putting more restrictions in place so that City Council can consider these on a case-by-case uh basis rather than have these go in by right with with no mitigation.

Uh so that's what we're looking at is really making these a conditional use so that when these do come online that that uh it does require a public hearing, it does require city council to take a look at before uh these are cited.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Bond.

Thank you, Mayor West.

I have several questions.

Um question I was right behind um Dr.

King with the question about uh continue uh conditional use.

So um I do like that we are going to consider that.

That way the citizens have an opportunity for some input.

Um, when do you plan on presenting to council a resolution?

Approximately date, two months, three months, a month.

Yeah, so we we we intend on bringing that to you very quickly, uh probably next month if if at all possible, so that we can have these run concurrently.

Uh what you know, the goal would be that we considered both the text amendment and any policy that goes along with that text amendment concurrently, so council could take one action uh to make sure that everything is lined up.

Okay.

Also, you stated earlier that you've already the meeting with stakeholders.

What kind of response did you get from the citizens?

So the stakeholder committee has been uh absolutely fantastic to work with.

Uh you know, I think that when we talk about uh you know uh tough issues like data centers and other considerations, it's great to have good dialogue around the table where we have uh members around that that are representing a variety of interests, uh, whether that be you know the citizens' perspective, particularly as it's related to the impacts on adjacent properties, the industry's perspective about uh you know the realistic uh uh implementation of stipulations as it's related to this and what's not realistic.

So it's it's been absolutely great uh working with our stakeholder committee uh to really wrestle with some of these tough and difficult issues.

Okay.

And um two last questions.

Um if you do you know where they are closest data center is to our area?

I'd like to go visit one to see what it's all about.

Um there is one data center in uh in Hampton Roads.

Uh it's called Global Links.

Okay.

Um it is located in Virginia Beach.

It is a very small data center, uh, but it is a data center nonetheless.

Um I think one of the key when you are considering data centers, you have to realize that there are several different types and sizes of data centers.

Uh we have not seen the large-scale, hyperscale data centers here in Hampton Roads, but there is a small data center in the corporate landing industrial park in the city of Virginia Beach.

Uh I think it was placed there primarily to leverage the location of the uh offshore cables, the data cables that come offshore and land at Virginia Beach.

Okay.

And the last question I have is um maybe for Mr.

Price, I know we had conversation earlier.

Can you explain to council about um if a data center is connected with a bank, their tax rate or they don't have a tax rate, or what is it?

There are several unusual provisions of the State Code regarding data centers.

One is for data centers that are associated with the banking industry, they are exempt from certain some certain taxes.

So it's something that we're mindful of as we're considering a data center deal to make sure that we're presenting all of the information associated with that facility to council if we know that information up front.

And so sometimes you don't know who the end user is, and there have been jurisdictions that have been surprised with an expectation of tax revenue that didn't materialize because the function was related to the banking industry.

So we're looking to see what kind of countermeasures uh that we can have to make sure you have complete information.

Okay.

That's all the questions I have.

Thank you for your presentation.

Councilman Bond, thank you so much.

Uh Casman Jeffries.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh I'm not sure who on the panel would would want to chop off on this.

But beyond the tax revenues, are there any and can you share the benefits of having a data center in the city?

I'll try, Stephen.

So I I I worked on a lot of data center deals in Northern Virginia.

So it's an interesting addition to the economic development portfolio because you know, taxes would be the principal reason we would do it.

But we're looking for locations where the community wouldn't necessarily want traffic impact.

So the unique thing about a data center is unlike a manufacturing or commercial and office facility, there's very little traffic.

It's very few people that actually work in the data centers, the values in the in the equipment.

So in corridors that can accommodate economic growth, but maybe couldn't accommodate the traffic, that's a perfect complement.

Another area, so if you think about we have a lot of military installations, we have different protection zones around those installations.

There are some limitations on the type of development that can happen within those zones, but because there's so very few people uh working in data centers, though some of those limitations don't apply.

So we don't expect it to be a principal element of the portfolio, but it can be complementary where we can achieve those goals that the community would like us to achieve.

And does it make the city more attractive for additional economic development?

So it's definitely in addition to the portfolio, and one of the things we have tried to do and have done successfully in Chesapeake in the region over the years is diversify the portfolio of the businesses.

Historically, we have been so heavily dependent on the military and certain things associated with the Port of Virginia.

We have really diversified over time, and it does diversify the base.

And it's one of the reasons why the region and Chesapeake have chosen to build a fiber optic um uh network around the region, around the city to attract data centers, of course.

That's helping to leverage the power of those sub-sea cables, but also just to become bigger players in the information technology space.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Whitaker.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, Mr.

Manager, uh I don't know exactly who to direct this question to, but uh you know, the impacts that could potentially come with the data center.

Uh there's been a lot of concerns this past winter with with uh higher than usual electric bills.

Um power supply and and proximity to power supply, high tension power lines, substations, et cetera, uh play a factor in selecting or for a data center to select a location.

But uh is there any way that we could find out the potential impacts that would actually come to the consumer, and I'm and I'm talking the resident, uh, about the potential of heightened electric bills or power bills.

Or is that just a farce?

So interesting question.

If you recall, Vice Mayor Ritter a couple months ago asked us to engage with Dominion about the um energy bills, and we have had some productive conversations, and actually soon we have asked Dominion to dispatch a response to council's questions, and we will post that for the community.

We did touch on this um with them, so they'll they'll have some information for you.

But what I would say from my experience is if data centers are coming anywhere in Virginia, all of the ratepayers to some extent are paying for infrastructure associated with the entire grid, right?

So it's not just data centers, it's it's it's any transmission line, distribution facility, substation, those costs are um spread out among ratepayers.

Dominion and the State Corporation Commission have been working over the past few years to try to find ways to have the user that's generating the need pay a larger portion of their more towards their fair share, if you will.

And so that's something that I believe Dominion is going to answer in their response to council's questions.

However, if a data center locates in Chesapeake or another locality, there's no difference to the ratepayers in Chesapeake.

That's that's really the key point in this is you'll hear sometimes that we don't want a data center in this locality because your rates will go up because of that.

That is not the case.

Okay.

Very good.

Thank you, Mr.

Major.

Thank you, Mayor.

Yeah, I will say there's been a lot of uh regional discussion about data centers and what cities would be appropriate in, and what cities they would not be appropriate in.

And I think what I like about what we are doing here is I think the message we want to send to the industry that we either are open for you know innovation and technology and so forth, or we are not.

And I think if as we develop these plans, the companies, uh data center companies will can be more convinced that they have a chance, not just a shot in the wind.

So I like what we are doing here so that we can either identify ourselves as open for business for data centers or not, and uh and and then plan accordingly.

But I do believe, and I'm not an expert by any means, but everything I have been told, you can't continue to do electric cars, you can't continue to do all the uh technology things that are required in society without these data centers.

So somebody has to do them.

It is nice if we can make a lot of money on them.

And before I move on to the next topic, I do want to say thank you to the team.

They have done a tremendous amount of stakeholder engagement and trying to balance that open for business philosophy with protecting the interests of the community and the environment.

Um it's working with those stakeholders that they identify those issues and are coming forward with those recommendations, and we really appreciate it.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Keep up the good work.

All right.

Next up, uh I want to just quickly start with a budget recap from where we ended last week.

Um of the proposals that during your straw poll we gave the thumbs up to, establishing the Fund Fridays program and Parks Rec and Tourism for kids to have things to do in the summer, um, adding a community program specialist, this was augmenting the service at the Stepping Stone Resource Center, adding um uh two additional staff members for the fire shift safety officers, if you recall, the proposed budget has it for um one shift.

The request is for all three shifts, and so these were the last two positions, the first two positions that didn't make the my proposed budget, but we certainly would encourage you to add them in the budget.

And then a market feasibility study for campus dollar redevelopment, recognizing that that 200,000 was the top line amount.

You have asked us to look to lower that amount.

We are having the conversations with the development partners potentially that that you all recommended.

But just as a concept, we want to continue to uh advance that.

We did talk about some General Assembly legislation.

Uh we're we're there we still have a lack of clarity.

I think everybody knows the governor made substantial amendments to certain pieces of legislation, um, made wholesale substitutes to certain pieces of legislation.

So we're still tracking those, but we want to answer some questions on on issues that that we have answers to.

Uh Vice Mayor Ritter asked um if we had a 30 percent increase to our capital projects related to the prevailing wage legislation when you add the interest in over time, you know, what does that percentage increase look like?

As we mentioned last week, it's it's 30 percent.

Um so if you have a 30 percent um increase to the base cost, that also translates into a 30 percent increase in interest and 30 percent increase in total cost.

But what you can see on the far right of this of this chart is on a uh well, in the totality of the chart for a non-prevailing wage project, um, a prevailing wage project and what that increase would look like on a hundred million dollars worth of capital facilities.

Um, you know, if you are talking a 30 percent increase over and above the natural increases associated with interest, it's a very it's tens of millions of dollars of increase to uh our capital projects with no um no additional projects being considered.

So with the size of our CIP, our our five-year CIP, um, the you know, the this this over time could be approaching 100 million dollars of additional cost.

However, um current versions of the bill um that are under consideration exempt local governments.

Um that wasn't the initial legislation.

Um that's where one one version stands right now, but we will continue to track and monitor.

So no action necessary on this right now, but I just want to be uh on council's radar screen that this is something significant that that we have to um uh keep our eyes on.

Um payroll taxes.

We talked about paid family medical leave.

I did have a question from someone last week.

If this was just localities or if this is private businesses as well, this is all employers over a certain size.

We'll have to pay additional paid family medical leave.

It's a 0.72 percent payroll tax, goes into effect in 2028.

That split between the employees and the city.

And so for the city, taking a look at the new legislation, we've revised our cost estimate to about $2.2 million annually.

Again, as it stands, does not go into place until 2028.

But again, I just want it to be on council's radar screen as we're making choices for the upcoming budget.

Summer youth employment program.

We had conversation, I believe the original request was for about 250 youth.

We don't uh as we talked about last week, we don't have the ability to hire and and and train up and supervise 250 youth for this coming summer.

We'd like to start, as Councilmember Smith said last week, we have to start somewhere if we're going to do the program.

So we recommend 20 youth.

I'm going to concentrate in in things that would be relatively safe.

Um parks, recreation and tourism and libraries would be where we would go first.

We did promise you there's a lot of programs out there with schools has a summer program, workforce development council has a program, some other cities in the region have programs, so we we owe you some information about what's going on region wide.

Um I estimate the cost of this program if we launch it this summer, since funds wouldn't be available until July, um, you know, we we we would get a couple months in, so that we you know, depending on the number of students and the hours work, this would be less than 100,000.

So we are recommending um advancing this project, but we'll have a little more fine-tuned number next week.

Um Councilmember Smith asked about contributions to the Chesapeake Care Clinic.

So you can see historically over the past four years, and then in the proposed budget where we've been, uh that purple bar indicates general fund funding.

Um, some of that's through human services grants.

The blue portion of the bar was in years where they received funding through community development block grant program.

Um, so you can see where that uh stands over time.

Um as I mentioned with the human services grants, because council just a few months ago at your retreat asked us to come up with a dashboard of success, taking a look at um recidivism metrics and the outcomes we're achieving.

We're for this year, we're not recommending any increase to our human services programs, but it was a question asked, and so we wanted to provide that information to council.

Um council also asked what how what's the breakdown by city of of where clients come from.

So you can see the majority, uh almost um three quarters are Chesapeake residents.

Remember that in our performance criteria for the grants that the city provides, they are required to serve Chesapeake residents, and so um that that's part of the reporting mechanism that we'll be providing back to council for all human services grants.

Um I mentioned the human services metrics, so we're working on those dashboards for council that um if you approve the dashboard, if it meets your needs, we'll update those dashboards annually along with performance reports for the Uban Services Grants.

But again, we don't recommend increases in the coming uh fiscal year.

Uh pending requests, I mentioned last week the airport authority submitted uh capital improvement program request for just under $1 million over five years.

Um they have a request for $162,000 in year one of the CIP.

Um that's probably if you if you choose to advance um the proposal rather than the total one million over five years, I would recommend you just advance the year one if that's what council is interested in.

And I believe the airport authority um and we we have representatives here this evening.

Um I believe they sent council something today with with information about that request.

And then some proposed amendments from me from the draft budget.

Um we've had some conversations with council, a little bit about enhancements we're making to customer service and public utilities.

We're working right now with the customer contact center to roll calls over when we experience larger than typical call volumes.

I would like to add three positions in the budget to address uh we we have an increasing system and increasing customer base, increasing complexity in the system.

So I think it would be prudent to add capacity to build in some additional customer service support in the utilities department.

Um and then also in the uh radio internal services.

I'll discuss that uh program in a minute.

For public utilities, I'm requesting the addition of three uh positions.

Um it's the staff supplies and equipment is about 187,000.

One thing to remember this isn't competing with other projects.

This is enterprise fund money specifically for the utility.

So this will have no material impact on the remainder of the budget.

And we have the capacity to absorb this request in the utilities fund.

And then the radio internal services charge.

So as you can imagine, with all of our departments and all of the radios that we deploy, it's a very significant expenditure, right?

And so we have that across our public safety agencies, parks and rec, public works, the schools.

We have very significant capital needs in this area.

So we have to replace our towers and equipment and you know every everything that goes into that.

So very, very significant system replacement.

You can see it's it's approximately 17 million dollars in the 10-year life cycle of this program.

And so since we we charge these expenses to the programs, to the departments that use the use the radios.

So departments that have no radios, they they pay nothing into the radio replacement uh program.

Departments that have a lot of radios, they pay a lot into the radio program.

So as we took a look at how to distribute costs, we realize that schools have a very significant amount of radios, but they're not paying anything into the into the internal services charges like some of our departments are.

And so we've started the conversation with schools about um treating them like a department, you know, dependent upon the number of radios that they would pay into the system similar to uh parks or public works or or the other departments that use it.

Um for schools, this it's a pretty big number, and uh we won't we've been having these conversations for several months, but they're sort of still digesting what their options are.

So my request is that we defer this decision for one year and and the city would continue to pick up these charges while um while schools considers their options.

And that is all of the changes I have.

So I I believe we have direction on everything, but I'd like to go backwards if I could and just kind of get uh straw poll thumbs up, thumbs down like we did last week.

Um is everyone good with deferring the decision for schools on the radios for a year to allow them to have time to sort of absorb the magnitude of the cost.

This is basically operating just like we are today.

Yes, yes.

Okay.

Um the enhanced customer service for utilities.

Yes.

I see some double thumbs up on that one.

Um airport authority, so 162,000 for year one.

Additional time.

Okay.

I just got that.

Yeah.

May I ask a question about that?

Okay.

Okay.

Um so they did submit a request and they outlined the specifics as to why they wanted that additional funding.

I wanted to know what you thought about those requests.

Are they reasonable requests?

Yes, ma'am.

So we we are just absorbing that as well.

So in the out years, they have some very significant capital projects.

I think they're all necessary projects, right?

Um, but they have some very significant capital projects for this year.

They're they're pretty modest.

They're they're sort of work trucks and security enhancements to to the facilities.

Um I do think that they are reasonable.

I would also like another week to maybe digest the um the impacts though before we kind of get a sense thumbs up or thumbs down for everybody, and we'll have a better recommendation next week.

Human services grants, our recommendation is, and and this goes for Chesapeake Care Clinic as well.

Our our recommendation is continued level funding for human services grants for this year, at least until you have access to the information that you have asked for.

Yes.

And then the summer youth employment program.

I think the top line number would be 100,000.

I think it's likely to be less than that.

So this is something we're recommending advancing.

Yeah.

Mr.

Mayor West, I have a question, comments.

Okay.

Um I know in our last work session, we talked about what the school division is doing for summer youth.

Did you did you get any information back from them yet?

Yes, ma'am.

So yes, sir.

We are compiling the information right now.

We we as I mentioned we have schools, we have the workforce council and and and a couple different programs.

So I want you to give you a complete report on what other folks are doing.

I think it would be good.

I think we could get some youth um into the city to complement those programs, but I do want you to have the complete um picture.

Um in addition, once we have that picture, we probably could be doing, not probably, we could be doing a better job collectively of marketing those opportunities to youth within the community.

So once you all have that complete picture and we've sort of bought into what the program is there, we really intend to push that information out to community groups to try to get students interested in a variety of these programs.

Yeah.

And also I know that back when we had this program years and years ago, they partnered with the school division to get the word out too.

So that definitely try to do that.

Um also I'm hoping that we'll explore the different areas, not just one area of the child of the youth that we're going to hire for the summer program, like consider all the areas in Chesapeake for that.

Yes, sir.

So we we started pretty late in year one because it's a lot of um in addition to the youth coming on board, we need to have meaningful things for them to do in a safe environment with adequate supervision.

So, you know, I think that though I think they're pretty good candidates, but I agree with you.

We'll try to broaden that.

If it's a successful program, um, we'll try to broaden that scope in the future.

But I what I'm about that is like just don't have it all in like one area, one plant area like Western brand, do Western Brands maybe five or you know, different different areas, different populations.

Councilman Whitaker.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um I guess we're getting probably to the tenth hour in budget.

Uh Mr.

Manager, if you could, there's been a lot of discussion we've we've had over the past month.

Um if there's a way, if you could come back at the property or personal property tax rate, what it would look like and what impacts there would be potentially for a two, four, six, maybe even an eight cent cut if there is room in the budget to make a cut.

Uh if you could come back with something for council, I greatly appreciate it.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

With uh this we would need to know I mean I'll also factor in some of the things that we talked about that we know are coming as well, right?

I think that that will be a good balance for consideration because we we might have some capacity.

I would have to check with uh Jonathan, so we'll run the numbers and we might have some capacity, but you have some massive capital projects on the horizon.

The public safety training academy and the um Career and Technology Center, which, although it comes out of schools budget, is still part of our debt capacity, um, and some of the economic development projects collectively, it's those are the biggest projects in the city's history.

Um in addition to what I talked about coming from the General Assembly that are still kind of unknown.

Um so over the course of the next week, we'll kind of put that complete picture together so we you have good information to make a decision.

Thank you.

Uh Ms.

Nowis.

Uh Mr.

Manager, back to I know you're going through all the items.

When we're talking about the summer youth employment program, would it be advantageous for us to get the information regarding the similar programs to see if there's even the need for an additional program to be started at this time?

I would hate for us to get the cart before the horse start the program, and then we learn that these programs don't have interest from students to participate.

I mean, should we put off another week or two?

I don't think it would hurt at that point.

I just don't want us to be too duplicative.

Or do you know that there's a need for it in the community?

I think there likely is a need.

Okay.

Um so the the amount of resources that are available between schools and the workforce council in particular, they're they're really good and solid, long-standing programs, but they're nowhere near serving all the youth that would be interested.

Um so we're sort of balancing that with our capacity to take it on.

And um and if we if we did you know do a program like you know, to your point, we don't want to duplicate something that's going on, but we don't want it to be so big that it we it's unwieldy, and then we stop doing it before we really have our our feet on it.

But I I do appreciate what you are saying, and and we'll continue to track this and get more information before um even if we even if we were to budget for the program, if we felt between now and July 1st that it wasn't necessary, we don't necessarily need to execute the program.

So we'll continue to gather information.

And then to the request that Councilmember Whitaker brought forth, uh, when you bring forth those numbers, can you present to us at the two cent reduction rate?

If council were to implement these things, what the trade-off would be.

So what items we would need to cut uh as a result of that in order to achieve that.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman King.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So for the Chesapeake Care Clinic, I thought I heard you say that the grant required us to service Chesapeake citizens, but that's not exclusive.

Is that correct?

So we have many of our nonprofit providers that provide services to folks from other jurisdictions, but the money Chesapeake gives them has to be used on Chesapeake clients.

And I believe that's similar across them jurisdictions within the region.

Well, I'm not sure what I'm saying.

Thank you.

Council is now in session.

I'd like to recognize Council Member Smith at this time for the invitation and the leaders in the Pledge of Allegiance.

We understand we all have peace and we have values to endure.

As we meet tonight, let us not lean on our own understanding, but lean on you for guidance.

We praise you and we honor your name.

Amen.

Amen.

Please join us to the President of the Allegiance of the Flag.

And to what you say with the road.

Thank you, Councilman Smith.

Appreciate that prayer and the pledge.

Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Councilmember Bunn.

Here.

Councilmember Jeffries.

Here.

Councilmember King here.

Councilmember Newens here.

Councilmember Smith.

Here.

Councilmember Ward.

Present.

Councilmember Whitaker.

Present.

Vice Mayor Ritter is excused.

Mayor West.

Next is the approval of the proposed agenda.

Are there any changes to the proposed agenda?

Council members have.

See none.

Can we have a motion, please for approval?

Move approval of the agenda.

Thank you, Dr.

Ward.

Thank you, Mr.

Smith.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Motion to approve the agenda as presented is adopted by an 8-0 vote.

We have two uh proclamations or presentations.

Uh today we recognize Earth Day, Wednesday, April 22nd, 2026.

A moment set aside to reflect on our shared responsibility to care for the environment and preserve the natural beauty that surrounds us.

I'm especially proud to acknowledge that our city continues the continued designation as a tree city USA community.

This prestigious recognition reflects our strong commitment to the preservation of green spaces that enhance the quality of life for all who live, learn, work, farm, and play, and visit here.

We extend our appreciations to our parks and recreation and tourism department for their hard work and diligence, their dedicated service and maintaining and enhancing the natural beauty of our city.

I'd like to ask Mike Barber, our Parks and Recreation Director, to come to the podium and provide brief brief remarks.

Thank you, Honorable Mayor and City Council.

We're so excited to be here tonight to just talk a little bit about Earth Day and Earth Month and really with our department and working with the CEIC.

The whole month we really do a lot of different celebrations.

We kick in the spring, we do a lot of recycles days, we are doing tree tours, we're doing a lot of outdoor programming, just um really dedicated to showing our appreciation for all that goes on environmentally as well as with um our earth and taking care of its resources and trying to be good stewards of that as we go forward.

Um we're very excited about some of the events like say that we are doing.

Um this weekend, for an example, we've got um a fix-it-up um event that we're doing to recycle some different type of uh radios and all that instead of just throwing them in to the to the dump.

Um we're doing a paint the trash cans.

Um we're doing several tree tours.

Uh we know we have the arts festival.

That's the that's that's going on too, but um it's just a lot going on, but uh recognizing the earth and it has been for the whole month.

Um and really it it on Friday um is a huge day because really the centerpiece of a lot of what we do and what is Chesapeake will be the reopening of the Williamson Farmhouse at the Chesapeake Arboretum.

And we're having an event called Moo and Moore.

Yes, MU means some there'll be some cows there.

Um we're gonna do that farmhouse um appreciation um and getting that back open.

We thought it was more the most appropriate to get the Arborina back open during um Earth Week, kind of uh this and celebrating all the activities that we're doing.

But we can't think about the environment, can't think about recycling without our Chesapeake Environmental Improvement Council.

And tonight um we have Amy Weber, who is the uh chair, and she'll be coming up uh along with several of the CEC members, and also I'd like to recognize two of our outstanding staff, um Nikisha Bridgers and Kate Vanderpool.

Uh these folks are really just rocking it, especially um with a lot of the outdoor programming that you've seen lately.

And they were the ones that volunteered to say we'll do the planetarium when the planetarium came.

Um so they've been uh doing that, and um again, we've had about five or six programs again this month at the planetarium.

So great job to them.

But now I'm gonna turn over and present this resolution to Amy on behalf of CEIC and welcome all the members.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mike.

So in addition to Mike's uh praise of these two, um the CEIC could not operate without them.

So we are very grateful and to Mike as well.

Umorable Mayor West, City Council members, and other city staff here.

Um thank you so much for the proclamation for Earth Day 2026.

Um we appreciate that you have a commitment to serving uh the City of Chesapeake in the in the best environmental way possible in your actions with um approving um different things that come along your path.

Um the CEIC members uh we recognize the many challenges that um as noted in the proclamation that are that come our way that that threaten our environment.

And we um we serve to advise and to educate the public on um how we can best offset those challenges.

Um tonight we are here very casually in our t-shirts, our CEIC T-shirts, because we are a working group.

We beyond our meetings, we dedicate thousands of hours, not each, but over time probably, but um many hours to you know clean up, to educate the public on uh how to protect our trees, how to reduce waste, how to um to landscape in the best environmental way possible for a healthy city.

So again, we um are very grateful for it to you and for the proclamation for Earth Day and all that that encompasses.

We are definitely believe in have to refer to my notes to work uh this is an annual reminder for the constant need for environmental awareness and responsibility, stewardship, sustainability efforts to make Chesapeake a greener, cleaner, and healthier city in which to live, learn, work, farm, and play.

And on relating to all the the past things that our projects we've done, just a reminder to all of you, you are invited to our Earth Day open house tomorrow morning at 11 a.m.

at River Crest Community Center.

We are working on lots of displays to show you all that we have accomplished and how we are working to promote a healthier environment in Chesapeake.

Thank you very much.

And before we before we uh clap, I just want to say over the years that just that the number of things that your group has done is just incredible, more than just a reminder.

I mean, there are so many events during the year that help kids really get into understanding why they should be uh care caring about their environment.

You you all are behind that and doing that education.

And we really do appreciate it.

So on behalf of all of us, thank you.

Thank you.

May is building safety month, a time dedicated to raising awareness about vital role in protecting our community through safe construction, sound infrastructure, strong code enforcement.

We extend our appreciation to the Department of Development and Permits for their commitment to ensuring that structures in our city are built with integrity and inspected with diligence and maintain with safety in mind.

Building safety is more than code and compliance.

Yet it stands at at the front of the safe safeguarding our lives, protecting families and preserving investments and more.

I'd like to ask Jake Tate, Director of Department of Development and Permits, Wendy Tabler, uh Building Code Administrator, Lee Osteller, uh Code Enforcement Administrator to come forward.

And Mr.

Mr.

Jay will receive the proclamation and give remarks.

I'm sorry.

Yeah, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the staff of development and permits that work every day, all year long as it relates to reviewing plans and doing inspections.

They do it with the spirit of making sure your lives are safe, but they also do it to help people with their making their dreams come true and their biggest investments protected.

We also work with the fire prevention staff to also ensure that they are considered as part of that.

And none of this can all be accomplished without working with our partners in the community, which includes the architects, the engineers, the builders, the tradespeople, and together that entire group works to make sure that buildings are constructed safely.

And I think it's an important month, and I appreciate your recognition.

Mr.

Tate, you uh what you do can often be a little bit of a conflict for new businesses, but honestly, just the opposite.

Uh the manager was talking telling me the other day just about some of our biggest companies that are coming to Chesapeake, and part of what they like is working with your group and making it so easy for them to do what they need to do and and doing it right.

So we really do thank you, appreciate you and your team.

Next is applicants, uh agents and citizens' comments on public hearing items.

The City Council meeting constitutes a limited public forum.

Therefore, public comments must be relevant to items on the agendas uh tonight.

When speaking on an agenda item, please make sure your comments directly reflect the merits of the application, which means you focus on the details and the facts of the proposed agenda item.

Focusing on comments on the merits of the application will ensure that the public hearing serves its intended purpose of gathering relevant information for the voting body.

Further, to strike a balance between maintaining order and honoring the public's right to express themselves, and as established by the City Council's rules of order and procedures.

Any speaker that delays, interrupts, or otherwise disrupts City Council's ability to conduct its meeting in an orderly manner by disorderly insolent or disturbing action, speech, or other conduct, will be declared out of order.

Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers who wish to speak prior prior to the presentation of public hearing items?

Not at this time.

Thank you.

Next is the Council's consideration for public hearing items.

I would like to uh recognize Councilmember Whitaker at this time.

Thank you.

Um I have a personal I have a personal interest in disqualify for participating on public hearing item A Scenic Heights because I have a professional service to the applicant.

As my client may benefit from my transaction, I may I am disqualified from participating pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3112A.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, would you please present uh planning public hearing item A?

PLN PUD M2025-001, Scenic Heights PUD Modification.

C Chris Scenic LLC applicant, C Chris Scenic LLC and JCBLLC owners, Williams Mullen Agency for a modification to the Scenic Heights PUD to alter the development timeline for the required right-of-way and infrastructure improvements to remove the previously approved walking trails and to clarify the details of the scenic loop.

The property is located south of Dominion Boulevard, west of Shillalee Road, and east of Scenic Parkway in the Grassville Planning Area.

The Planning Commission recommends approval with development criteria dated February the 18th, 2026, and master development plan dated May 29, 2025.

Thank you.

Planning Director McNamara, what's the planning staff's recommendation?

The proposed development will remain consistent with the land use recommendations as set forth in the Dominion Boulevard Corridor Study.

Staff therefore recommends approval of the development criteria dated February 18, 2026, and master development plan dated Mark May 29th, 2025.

Thank you, sir.

Madam Clerk, do we have any speakers to this time?

Yes, sir.

We have four speakers.

The first being Grady Palmer, Williams Mullen, followed by Jeff Staples.

Good evening, Mayor West, members of the City Council and staff.

My name is Grady Palmer.

My business address uh 222 Central Park Avenue in the City of Virginia Beach.

As you know, this project uh was approved a couple of years ago.

It's a very large project that I'm proud to have been associated with.

Um, oftentimes with large planned unit developments, uh, we come back uh for tweaks and minor changes uh to the development criteria uh that's associated with the planned unit development.

And that's basically like a little mini zoning ordinance that goes that's approved and adopted uh by City Council that that is the governing uh zoning ordinance for the development.

And so what there's two things that we're requesting here.

One is to help us better sequence uh the timing of road improvement.

So one of the major uh features of Scenic Heights is we we are extending ward road all the way through the project to connect uh to the Dominion uh Commerce Park, which will open up a new uh vehicular pathway uh to Grassfield High School.

So right now, if you're coming from Cedar Road, you're you want to get to Grassfield High School, you're coming down ward, you're turning left on Shilleley, uh, you're going down to Vinsec uh and then up back up uh um to Grassfield.

And so uh this will be a straight shot.

It was a big feature of the rezoning uh uh that we talked a lot about uh the you know making the road system in this area in particular modern, and this was a big modernization feature, and so what we're doing here in the in this request is we we had some provisions that assumed that we were gonna start construction on the Shillalee Road side, when in reality we're all we're gonna start construction on the Dominion Commerce Park side, and so we're gonna work uh east uh from Dominion Commerce Park, and so what's been requested is that will help us sequence the the uh installation of that roadway.

So uh second thing that we're requesting to be changed uh is there is a uh we discovered a forested wetland in the middle of of uh scenic uh well call it scenic loo, but it's it's a large forested area on the uh western side of the property that was a big open space.

And so what we're doing instead of crisscrossing uh the wetlands is we're doing a perimeter uh path and elevated uh uh boardwalk area, so just to avoid those forested wetlands.

Um nothing about the development is changing.

Um none of the quality, none of the none of the architectural design that was built in.

Only those two things are being requested uh for consideration.

So just want everybody to understand that's all that's before the council tonight.

Uh and with those tweaks, we will start, and we already have started construction, but one of the other things I wanted to just make clear for the record.

The ownership did change uh during this process.

And so uh the ownership now is in an LLC that is uh that's owned by the Bichard uh company, so they are the developers.

And this is this this is who uh uh would primarily say benefit, but because it isn't a benefit, it's just a reorientation.

But we'll be the ones that will take these development criteria if you're approved and will begin developing uh the road network.

And so um uh all the other building elevations and and materials, none of that's changing.

We're not requesting any of that to be changed.

I did just want to say it did was a little maybe technically right, uh the legal description about removing walkways, but in my view, it's just adjusting uh the pathways to the perimeter of that forest to avoid the forested wetlands and in the center.

So with that, I'll stand by for any questions that you have.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Jeff Staples representing CEP speaking in opposition, followed by Christina Teewin.

Good evening.

I'm Jeff Staples.

I live at 1453 Boxwood Drive in the Deep Creek section of our city.

Um I'm here tonight because uh this uh proffer adjustment really is not proper.

Uh the elimination of trails because of wetlands is a shock to me as far as this project goes.

Is this proper property was being developed, areas I knew of on that property held water and would be considered wetlands.

They often magically disappeared, and earth-moving equipment could be seen closely nearby.

Um there are probably some drainage concerns going on here.

Um the land down there has never drained properly.

We've had to do multiple repairs of um the high school down there, replace the tennis courts and much more, uh gym floor, that kind of thing.

So they don't have a grip on the uh drainage, is what I'm thinking.

And uh this is another way of extending that.

The uh trees that are being cut down now are supposed to have remained in place.

Um this is causing some concern, especially with the uh children over at uh Cardinal Estates because the baby birds are crashing down all around.

So um it tells me that they're trying to increase the status of the retention ponds, and uh this is uh how they're going about it.

Also mentioned that um certificates of uh occupancy would be issued quicker.

So that's another profit incentive there that we don't need to work with.

I'm sure that uh fire safety would be much more enhanced if we stayed with what was originally agreed to.

And uh before they get into these projects, um, it's the same thing with all the continuances that we keep getting.

They need to do their due diligence here and figure these things out before they break ground and uh inconvenience us all and cost us all more money.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Christina Twin representing CEF speaking in opposition, followed by Janet Killliger.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor and City Council members.

My name is Christina Tewin.

I'm right next to the project, or my mom is as always.

I always say that to you, and I mean that.

It is my understanding that this particular agenda item regarding scenic kites once again was allowed due to the new ownership.

Didn't we know this before?

However, the previous owner and the current owner seem to have been working on this project together all along.

So I I don't know why we have to make changes now.

Um the promise made for a walking path for all to use in the wetlands forest should be a promise kept.

That was the one thing that appealed to me personally that I thought was nice about the whole project.

The only thing.

Anyway, so how can we residents and city council be assured that the trees which have been destroyed are not those that are part of the pro-off or modification on the agenda for today?

I mean, they've already started taking down all these trees, and they don't even have approval from you, but they already went ahead with it, it looks like.

Several grass field residents had to put in new wells at great expense, including us, due to the disruption of the aquifer.

I hope you will consider your constituents when improving so many high-density projects, and do not allow developers to disregard the nice amenities that they promised.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Janet Killiger, representing TCC speaking in opposition.

Good evening, everybody.

Um, my name is Jeanette Killow.

I usually don't speak uh uh events or anything or meetings, but I'm a former um student of Grassville High School, and I'm also a student at TCC, and I'm in the horticulture program.

Um I'm not sure if you're familiar, but Twin Greenhouses is on Vincick, um, the road in between Shilele and Grossville High School.

Um last year my horticulture class took us to a field trip there, and we got to talk with the owner, and unfortunately, due to the new developments and everything going on, um, there has been like um the previous concerned citizen before me stated, um, there's been reduced um water table, you know, water pressure ever since you know new developments came in, and we don't have the infrastructure as far as I know, like past that Walmart.

And we don't have the infrastructure as far as I know, like past that Walmart.

We're all in well water.

So when those new developments did come in, um, we did notice a difference as well, um, as did the owner of T-Wing Greenhouses.

She has stated that she has had to stop selling pointsettas because um, and again, no hate to grass field, but the lights from the football fields like affected their growing cycles, so they weren't like flowering to completion or becoming uh unsellable product.

So their um inventory did get affected that year, had to cut out, you know, adjust make changes.

Um not only that, I'm concerned as well because I'm seeing increased um roadkill on Shileli uh due to like the animals being driven out, the logging, um, the trees being cut down, and I'm concerned because I have driven by and those big orange signs that said this meeting today.

Like I'm not sure if they had the proper requirements to cut those trees down prior to this council meeting, but it was a little sad to see that.

Um I'm like concerned on the infrastructure, you know, the water table.

Um I'm concerned for the environment.

I'm concerned for um the curriculum at TCC with the horticulture program, and I'm very concerned about our loss of farmland in Chesapeake.

Um I even wrote a paper about it in my um classes.

We've lost at least 10% of our farmland in Chesapeake just in the last few years, and Chesapeake has you know is a big home to agriculture.

Um there's neighbors I've had to sell.

Um there's a big solar farm that moved in behind our neighborhood.

I'm not sure if you know which one I'm talking about, but um that's another concern.

And then another can um worry that I had is can preserving the rural and beautiful aesthetic of Grassville High School.

When I um attended Grassfield High School, I graduated in 2014, by the way.

Um it was it was beautiful, like it was called Grassfield because there was grasslands everywhere around us, and since then it's just huge development in front of and just a lot of traffic.

There's like four storage units in front of Grassfield, and I'm not sure why we need four, but there's four.

Um besides that, um that and the changes to the walking trails, it makes me wonder if like it is it supposed to be protected or preserved.

Is there something like that?

Um like a more pressing issue that is possibly getting covered up with the changes to the walking trails, possibly.

Um, but besides that, I would hate to have to um lose an awesome small business, you know, small family owned business right on Vincic.

They still sell, I mean, they're still active, they have geraniums and other things.

But um, thank you so much for listening to me and for your time, and I appreciate you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you so much.

That concludes the speakers.

Thank you.

That does conclude the speakers.

I motion is in order.

Uh development criteria dated February 18, 2026 and massive development plan dated 20 May 29, 2025.

Can we have a motion, please?

Ms.

Newlis?

Move approval as presented.

Thank you.

We have a second, please.

Do we have a second, please?

Second.

Thank you, Mr.

Smith.

Uh discussion.

Ms.

Newitz.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh Mr.

McNamara, the walking trail, do you mind identifying it for us on the screen?

Is it in that photo?

And prior to this uh change being presented, can you identify the gist of where it was going to be?

Was it gonna be through the wetlands there?

Yeah, if I could speak.

So the scenic trail has always been part of the the concept here.

Uh what's being removed with this is uh a series of mulch trails that were proposed to go throughout the the wetland area.

Um there are certainly some challenges when it comes to mulch trails, particularly in wetlands.

We think with good rain, those those tend to disappear uh because of the nature of where they are, but be glad to identify.

Okay.

There was a speaker that indicated that it would accelerate it.

So those uh those timing triggers have been reviewed extensively with the the Department of Development and Permits in order to ensure that uh infrastructure gets put in place at the right time to uh to address any of the impacts from that development.

I think uh more than anything else, it's it's a it's a timing of when they're getting to the different sections less than the the speed that they are going to be constructing all of them in totality.

Okay, and then the applicant indicated those are the only two changes.

Can you confirm are those the only two changes that are being presented through this modification?

Everything else is able to proceed as previously presented.

Yes, ma'am.

So it as outlined in the development criteria, most of the changes are related to those timing triggers.

So that's where you're gonna see a majority of the markup within the development criteria itself.

But as far as the subject matter, yes, those are the changes that are being proposed.

The rest of the development criteria remains in place as was uh previously adopted by council.

Is there anything preventing the walking trail, the mulch trail from being enacted?

I guess it's just the conditions there make it impossible, it seems uh I believe it's it's the conditions or may would make it an extreme challenge, and then the longevity of that type of improvement in that area would probably not be uh would not be there for long, and I think that's part of the challenge of this.

And then just a couple of questions for the applicant.

Um the mulch trail.

Do you mind addressing the reason why I guess I know it's wetlands, but is there anything prohibiting you from doing it legally, or is it just feasibility?

Yeah, so the one of the things that it was a is and it's really just a clarification because the the originally adopted PUD criteria had a phrase in there that said if permittable.

Um so it really was uh you know, if we went to the Army Corps of Engineers and could get a permit for it, then we would do it.

If we couldn't, then we wouldn't.

So it's not even really uh not really even a deletion because there was that provision that allowed for the the eventuality that if the Army Corps and DEQ didn't approve it, we wouldn't have we wouldn't install it.

So this is really just a clarification that that is in fact the case.

Um so that's why so much sort of effort was sort of put on the width of the trail.

So a lot of uh new versions of the yeah.

If you can address the reasoning the width was not real clear in the originally adopted the development criteria.

And so we we went very painstakingly to identify the width.

And so you see the three colors there uh that identify uh 10 foot, I think it's eight foot and six feet, and those are all you know city standard widths.

And so that was not in the original development criteria, and we went to painstaking detail to make sure that every trail section is identified and has a minimum width.

But to answer your question, no, it wouldn't prevent us from doing it.

And we it's really not any different than the previous version because the previous version, you know, allowed us to to the eventuality the if the permit was denied, then we wouldn't build it.

So this is just sort of a clarification, but no, we wouldn't be prevented from doing it.

Based on your experience, do you think you would be able to obtain the permit based on the wetland status?

Well, I think to Mr.

McNamara's point, as this point was well taken.

I mean, the these are wetlands, so mulch material is it's just not simply going to be something that's gonna be permanent.

And we don't want to be putting concrete, you know, trails through there and tearing out the trees.

So I think this, you know, this provides a significant walking pedestrian capability and I think a better development criteria because it specifies the widths and identifies every section in its minimum width.

So in the previous development criteria, since the widths were not identified, were is it fair to say that you were then permitted to utilize the lowest weather level of widths across the exterior there?

Yeah, it was just not clear what what the widths were, and it was just um something that needed to be addressed any in no matter what.

And the six to eight feet, is the reasoning behind that because you have the wetlands there that it's not all ten?

That's right.

Yeah, we are trying to work within the constraints.

Okay.

And then there was some comments about trees being taken down.

Are you familiar with where the trees are being removed right now?

I believe they are clearing on the south, extreme south side of the property.

So if you look if you're at Ward Road and you and you turn left and you follow the uh the big water feature there, I think it's down in that area.

Okay.

Is that where is this HR2?

Is that where there's residential going?

Is that what you are indicated?

I think that's right.

Yeah, I think it's down in there.

Okay.

So that was going to be removed regardless if this went forward.

Correct.

Either way.

If this is turned down tonight, that I mean the project is going to move forward either way.

Okay.

This is just trying to better clean up some of the language and the development criteria.

Does this change require you to take down any additional trees?

No.

Okay.

Actually, it will help us re sustain some trees in the in the uh forested area.

Okay.

Thank you.

Those are all the questions.

Dr.

King?

Yeah.

Hello.

And thank you for being here.

It seems to me that we should have known in advance that the wetlands would have prohibited the trail before we dangled that carrot to our citizens.

Why is it we weren't aware of that and why didn't we do the research before we dangled that carrot?

It's a good question.

So oftentimes with with at the rezoning stage, you know, we're looking at we're 50,000 feet.

But when we get into the construction and we start doing all the soil testing and the very expensive site construction costs, we often do find in that that things pop up like this that um that we just didn't know about.

I mean, is it a you know when when you go from from rezoning to site construction, you do all the stuff where you go in and you do soil borings and you do all the stuff that cost a lot of money to develop the site.

And so we just can't feasibly do that at the rezoning stage before we even know we have a project approved.

So what what we have, like I said, it the original criteria did allow for wetlands contingency that if if it if it were wetlands, we wouldn't have to build it.

So I think in this case, the the the spirit of the PUD is being preserved.

I mean, there are substantial perimeter walking trails that are being installed, uh and the widths that were not specified are now being specified.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Jeffries?

Yes, sir.

So, Mr.

Palmer, you're saying that it would have taken extensive testing to determine that mulch trails weren't going to be available.

Well, I mean the entire project.

I mean, I mean, when we go from we go rezoning level, we do environmental site assessments.

I mean, we do we do a lot of analysis to know that the uh property is uh is buildable, like environmental site assessments, but we don't do soil borings and do all the you know um stuff that the engineers get involved with that comes at the site construction plan.

So oftentimes that does reveal certain things about the property that we didn't know at the rezoning stage.

I just I I guess I have to echo Dr.

King's sentiments that that was probably one of the features that was included originally to get the project approved that garnered the most support from the community.

And it's the one thing that is now being removed.

Well, I mean the the the I mean the the perimeter walking trail, it's just like um uh I mean it's not being removed.

I mean, it's the the the spirit of it is still there.

I mean the particular location might not be there, but the spirit of pedestrian connectivity and and availability is certainly there.

So the the trails aren't there, but the spirit of the trails are there.

Well, yes, sir, they are.

It is.

All right.

Thank you.

Mr.

Manager, um I guess there's uh a little uh unclarity uh in terms of the process.

You you you are Mr.

McMayer, would you like to speak to the the process of I like this, things that are approved initially but then changed.

Is that uncommon?

And why if it's not, then why is it why why did why does it occur?

Yeah, no, I think I will I'll take this as an evolution of the rezoning process here in Chesapeake as we've continued to draw more and more into the details of uh these different rezonings.

I will draw back a couple years ago where you know when when site plans were shown, the proffers weren't even in place to ensure that we were getting the site plans or the the the general development plans that were being presented.

Over time, we have certainly asked for more materials from um applicants to ensure that what they are uh showing on uh on general development plans and within development criteria are in fact uh reality to to what is gonna be developed later on.

You know, Scenic Heights is is one of these uh plan U developments that was reviewed extensively.

It's a big planned undevelopment and a lot of detail was was was uh looked into here.

Um however, yeah, I think that you know there are certain times that that that details come up later on in the process when additional uh additional uh layers of of review come into play when it whether it be through preliminary site plan process or the the the final site plan process that that uh either preclude uh you know what was originally intended for that site and uh then changes do happen.

So each one of those, you know, does require a uh an additional review whether when it comes back through for uh adjustments for proffers or adjustments to the site plan.

And we try to, you know, make sure that we are doing the best we can to evaluate those to make sure that uh those are consistent with what was originally approved.

And uh I understand that large majority of the changes here are the order of roads coming on.

Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

That is correct, and that is a common common practice when we have these larger rezonings that come through.

Eventually you get uh uh uh uh uh several partners that may come into play and they want to phase this out differently than what was originally intended.

Um and as part of our review, one of the things that we would want to make sure is any additional changes that come in from a phasing perspective does not impact us from an infrastructure standpoint.

So although things may come on at a different time, uh those infrastructure uh uh uh profits are still fulfilled.

Right neither of this, neither of the requests here substantially or change the the the application, is that correct?

None of the land use uh change there are no land use changes uh associated with this request.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none.

We do have a motion.

Madam Clerk, would you please read the motion?

The motion is to approve PLN PUD M 2025 001 with the development criteria date of January 18, 2026, and master development plan date of May 29th, 2025 as presenter.

Do you think you need to?

That's up to you.

Well, that's up to you.

I don't know.

If I may, Mr.

Mayor, just as a point of, I guess, discussion for council.

Um if the issue is with the trail, council members could make a substitute motion to approve the road changes without the trail attached.

Um so if that is a councilmember's will who do not want to see the trail removed, uh I would hate for the road changes to also be failed and they not be able to proceed forward with the the road changes.

Catherine, Ms.

Lindley, did you have a unfortunately in this case we would recommend that you not do that?

These are development criteria in the nature of proffers which are voluntarily offered, and we also have timelines for submission.

And so at this point in time, we would recommend that you vote on it as it is presented, or you also have the opportunity to continue it, and amendments could be made.

Okay.

Councilman Jeffers, did you have a based on that information?

I would make a motion to continue.

I have a motion to continue, substitute motion to continue.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Any discussion on the continuation?

Purpose for a continuance.

Pardon?

Purpose for the continuance.

I think to have consider what Ms.

Newens just suggested that they come back with uh two different I'm gonna just throw this out there.

It it doesn't I I keep trying to understand why you all think that they're removing trails or removing trails from what they're not using the uh mulch on a on a f wetland trail.

That's not removing trails from the project, as I see it anyway.

So anyway, that's the purpose of the motion.

Uh and we do have a motion for continuous, no other discussion.

Mayor, we would need a time limit on that continuance.

They have one.

60 days, 30 days.

I need 30 days.

30 days.

Is that your motion?

30-day continuance.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

The motion substitute motion is to continue for 30 days to the May 19th meeting, passes by a 4 to 3 vote.

The motion to continue.

Passes.

Thank you.

Next item, Madam Clerk.

PLN use 2024-040, take five battlefield book battlefield billboard.

Adams outdoor advertising applicant.

Staniel Bryan trustee, Matthew and Save Smith, and the Williams Tolson Trust owners for a conditional use permit to construct a billboard sign with a request for a reduction in setbacks in distance from residential property.

The property is located at 1440 Battlefield Boulevard North in the River Crest Planning Area.

The planning commission recommends denial.

However, if City Council chooses to approve the application, the stipulations listed in the official agenda are provided for consideration.

The applicant has submitted a revised stipulation number one dated March 24th, 2026.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Mr.

Backnamair.

The proposed billboard sign with requested reductions and setbacks in distance from residential property are not compatible with adjacent uses and would be a detriment to the visual environment and could negatively affect the economic viability of the property.

Staff record staff recommends denial of this request.

Thank you.

Speakers of Adam Clark.

Yes, sir.

We have three speakers.

The first speaker is Stephen Romine.

Speaking of support, followed by Greg Clark.

Good evening, uh Mayor West and the City Council for the record.

Mike, can you get your mic?

Start over.

Good evening, Mayor West and members of City Council for the record.

My name is Steve Romine, Williams Mullen 222 Central Park Avenue, Virginia Beach.

I'm here tonight representing Adams Outdoor Advertising in this conditional use permit to construct a replacement billboard at 1440 Battlefield Boulevard.

I have with me tonight Ted Sarrell, who is a real estate manager, and Greg Clark, who is our media consultant.

He's with a company called Media Resources in Charlotte, North Carolina, and he came up especially tonight to support the application.

As you all know from the staff report, we lost or Adams lost a billboard at 1441 Indian River Road, and pursuant uh to this code section, we're able to replace it.

So on page four of the staff report, you'll note that City Council adopted a revised ordinance in January this year, CZO Section 14706 B3 to allow for the replacement of involuntarily removed billboards to lots with existing development with the issuance of a use permit.

It also excuse me, it also gave City Council the discretion to approve various modifications to the design standards.

And I believe this application tonight may be the first application filed under this new ordinance.

The new ordinance was considered and discussed for over a year and was intended to address the loss of signage across the city.

We have been in conversation with the city for years because the industry has lost uh billboards and haven't been able to replace them, so the industry has lost about 30 percent of its business over that period of time.

So what the city has said is we don't want to see the industry go out of business.

We're gonna allow you to replace one for one.

When you lose the billboard, you can replace it somewhere else, and that's what this new ordinance was intended to do.

Uh the use permit before you tonight, plan use 2024, meets the requirements of the ordinance and is consistent with the comprehensive plan because it supports economic development across the city.

Over 80 percent of Adams' advertising is directly from local businesses in the Chesapeake market.

This is not an on-premise sign.

This is a off-premise sign.

It's a billboard sign controlled by a separate section of your your uh zoning ordinance.

Uh Adams did an exhaustive search for a replacement site.

Three factors are critical.

We need a willing landlord, appropriately zoned property, and uh a place that has access and visibility.

This site meets those standards.

Adams has also agreed to limit the LED signage to one side of its sign in order to reduce visual impacts to the adjacent hotel.

As you see the sign north and south on bullet battlefield, uh the opposite the back side of the sign was facing the hotel and had LED on it.

We have uh agreed to remove that, and it will now just be a static sign on the back side of the hotel, so that won't have any impact on them from lighting.

Um the six conditions recommended by staff in the report are acceptable.

However, you'll note that we revised those conditions a little bit after planning commission.

I think Ms.

Madison indicated that, but if you look at your staff report, it says since planning commission meeting, the applicant requested that stipulations be revised to restrict the south-facing billboard to be non-LED.

That's the side facing the hotel or digital, and that the north-facing billboard sign will utilize what we call site line LED technology.

And this is relatively new technology that has not been used in this area, and maybe not in Virginia at all.

And I have a gentleman here tonight, Greg Clark, whose company does this technology, and he's going to come up in a minute and show you how it works.

But by utilizing this directional LED, we will be able to restrict visibility of the sign at different angles.

Originally, when we filed this application, there's a heavy stand of trees to the back of the site that blocked the apartments that were built after the commercial corridor was created.

But what we've done, we have gone an extra step now with this new technology, so with the angles of the LED, that apartment won't see any lighting from the billboard.

We think that's a substantial improvement and change.

The reduction in setbacks are reasonable for access and minimal with respect to increase in visibility to neighbors.

Furthermore, since the Planning Commission Adams has agreed to implement this new site line technology, it will minimize the impact of the apartments.

Staff's position for denial is very subjective and is based on its opinion that a billboard should not be placed in a gateway.

Gateways are not really defined.

The argument is speculative and debatable.

A strong contrary argument can be made that this location in a highly trafficked commercial corridor is the best place to have a business sign of this type.

And by the way, there was no opposition at the Planning Commission.

Zero opposition from any neighbors.

Public service announcements are also a very important feature of LED technology in the billboard industry.

They contribute to the community's public and public safety.

They provide amber alerts, weather notices, crime line, been very substantial in that.

We do those announcements.

The wider the network, the more effective.

With the LED, we provide real-time upload capability.

Adams has committed significant space for public service announcements on the sign to the city and its uh location where it would be located.

It would be very significant contributor to public service.

So for these reasons, um I request that uh respectfully that you would approve CUP plan use 2024 40, and I'll stand by for any questions.

Thank you so much.

Greg Clark, representing Media Resources Inc.

speaking in support, followed by Ted Sorrell.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, City Council members, thank you for allowing me to speak tonight.

Uh I'm Greg Clark.

I'm with Media Resources.

We are a digital manufacturer company out of Charlotte, North Carolina.

Uh we have uh technology that is called sight line technology, it's light mitigating uh technology to where we can actually focus light to where it needs to be seen.

In this case, uh Adams wants to to display to Battlefield Boulevard with our technology, we can uh show our the advertisement to Battlefield Boulevard and restrict it from other the adjacent properties.

Uh we do this through the LED technology has 85 percent less up lighting and we have baffles or louvers that block light uh from the side.

Once you get 27 degrees from center of the sign, it appears it appears uh completely off.

So if if if Mr.

Mayor, if you were Battlefield Boulevard, you would not be able to see the sign from over here.

It would it would appear to be off and it would appear to be on here.

So we've we've done this with Adams Outdoors in in several markets, and we have this in several states uh across the United States.

And these here are not uh kind of plug and play.

We do these and and for each uh individual site.

What we do is we require a a site um analysis, and we have done that with Adams, and it has has been it has been uh uh submitted.

And what we do is uh we take a top graphical view of exactly where they want the light to be, and then we can position that and we can create a longer louvers and change the the viewing angle of our sign to where, like, say it's completely off to to where they do not want to show, which in this case is the residential area.

And I will be available for questions.

Thank you.

And Mr.

Clark did make a uh request for to show this technology, and if we decide in the discussion that it would it's necessary to help clarify or take a position, we'll do it.

Otherwise, we'll we'll just go on their testimony.

So thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Ted Sorrell representing Adams Outdoor Advertising, he's available for questions only.

That concludes the speaker.

Certainly do appreciate all speakers.

Uh next is uh motion, please, with the revised stipulations dated March 24th.

I would like to move approval with uh stipulations and revised stipulation number one dated March 24, 2026.

Thank you, Councilman Whitaker.

Mr.

Smith?

Second.

Thank you, sir.

Any discussion, Mr.

Whitaker?

You know, I I actually had the opportunity to uh meet with the applicant uh a little over a week ago, and so I first hand got to see the technology.

Um for the sake of clarity, the if you're southbound going northbound on battlefield, there would be no light projected facing south on battlefield, correct?

That is correct.

Okay.

And uh and if I remember correctly, with the technology that you have, it will be limited to about 40 degrees with the flag facing.

Because I don't think this right here really does what's going there justice, but it's going to be a flag, so it's going to set back away out of the line vision from the road, correct?

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Any other discussion?

Dr.

King?

Okay.

I'm sorry.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um yeah, I just had one question.

You're replacing the billboard from Indian River Road.

And I'm curious, how tall was that billboard?

About 35%.

I believe that existing billboard is 35 feet.

That's typically the height we have to put our billboards at.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Mr.

McNamara, does the amended stipulation does that change staff's position?

A revised stipulation.

No, ma'am.

The the revised stipulation addresses some of the concerns from staff, but not all of those concerns.

Is the main concern the location that it being in the gateway of Chesapeake?

Yes, ma'am.

Part of the part of the sign ordinance is to regulate the proliferation of signs.

And in this area, you've got a pretty uh pretty congested commercial area that has a lot of signage already in place.

And uh the placement of the billboard in this location and staff's uh view is uh inconsistent with uh with uh with with the ordinance.

Thank you.

And if I may, I would like to just say that you know I I I understand and appreciate that objection.

And the only reason that I would not want to put uh vote for this application is I don't want a proliferation of these signs and other congested areas.

However, I do believe this is an exception, so I do plan on supporting it.

Any other discussion.

Dr.

Ward.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Um just once when we had the meeting and you made it clear, excuse me, that from the back side of that sign, then there will be nothing as far as lighting and basically that dock covering in the back, so if any person in that um in the building looked out, they would only see the dock.

I want to make sure that residents and who are listening, I understand that.

You made it clear during the meeting, but you didn't make it clear tonight.

Yeah.

The sign face facing the hotel on the back side is not going to be LED.

It's going to be a static sign, in other words, just a normal sign.

LED technology is the upgrade that changes.

That's not we originally we were going to do that, but we took that off the table.

Right.

Thank you.

I that was important to me because anybody staying in the hotel and looking out and to see LED.

That was one of the changes we made.

Yeah.

Thank you.

We do have a motion for approval.

Any other discussions?

Seeing none.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

The motion to approve PLN use 2024-040 with revised stipulations dated March 24th, 2026, as presented, is adopted by a five to three vote.

Thank you.

Next item, please.

PLN use 2025-046, South Military Container Stacking.

1828 South Military Highway, LLC, applicant and owner.

Williams Mullen Agency.

For a conditional use permit to allow container stacking.

The property is located at 1814 and 1828 South Military Highway in the Green Bar Planning Area.

The planning commission recommends approval with the stipulations listed in the official agenda.

Mr.

McNamara.

The proposal is consistent with the policies, the economic prosperity section of the 2045 comprehensive plan and is compatible with adjacent uses.

Staff therefore recommends approval with stipulations day February 17th, 2026.

Thank you.

And our speakers today?

Yes, sir.

We have one speaker, Grady Palmer, Williams Mullen.

Good evening again, Mayor West, a members of City Council.

For the record, my name is Grady Palmer, my business address uh 222 Central Park Avenue in Central Virginia Beach.

This is an expansion of an existing uh business uh I think about a year, two years ago.

Council approved a conditional use permit for United Rentals to uh locate uh and and store and stack office and storage containers, and so your ordinance has uh regulations that apply to shipping containers and what it calls other containers, and so this is the other containers.

So these would be um United Rentals for uh uh containers for office uh temporary office space and storage.

Um right now there's a a facility uh at Snowdon Street over um uh uh Office 58 um that they currently operate in.

This will be an expansion of United Reynolds business, and so this is uh a small investment, but a new a new uh and expanding business in Chesapeake.

So there would be no, you see the container yards there.

Military highway is raised above pretty pretty significantly above the property.

Uh there are other uh surrounding pretty heavy industrial uses uh in the area, uh including a cement um uh uh operation down there to the left of the screen down at the bottom.

So I think this is the right spot uh for this, but it isn't uh an expansion of a business in Chesapeake, so I hope that you support it.

Thank you.

Motion please.

Move approval.

Second.

Uh Ms.

Lewis, Mr.

Jeffries.

Thank you.

Any discussion?

Discussion?

Yes.

Mr.

Smith.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, Mr.

Palmer, how far off the street will this unit be going back?

If you could share.

Yeah, if you can show the site plan, it's a pretty significant distance.

The roadway actually goes in front of the property.

Um so uh if you're if you're coming down military, if you're going up military highway towards Greenbrier and you turn right, and I forget the name of the little street there, but most of the businesses along that corridor access through service streets, right off the military.

And so if you turn right and you come back down, there's actually a pretty good amount of property between uh uh the uh the the actual site and military highways probably 60, 70 feet for military highway.

Military highway at that point is elevated uh and there's a standard tree, so you won't you won't even see the operation, but it's it's pretty well set back from for military.

So you say there would be trees also like the barrier?

There are.

There are existing trees right now.

Okay.

Thank you.

That vision of those trees, I speak.

Yeah.

We have a motion.

Oh, approval, a second.

Dr.

Ward.

Just quickly, uh, Mr.

Palmer.

Um, because we know we have had these before with the stacking and how many?

And are those things monitored?

Because this one does call for three, only three stacks.

And they say they are trees that are going to be part of a barrier.

But are the are you are they monitored so that nothing no higher?

Yeah, I guess they are monitored.

It is a condition that it only be stacked three high.

Uh and one of the conditions requires uh the fire department to have 24 hour access um to the property, and that actually worked with them because the circulation had to be um fire approved.

And so uh fire department will have full access.

The condition on the use permit is three high only, so those are enforced.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We do have a motion for approval.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record Madam Clark.

Motion to approve PLN use 2025-046 with stipulations as presented as adopted by an 8-0 vote.

Your microphone.

Sorry, thank you.

PLN use 2025-056 Eastcom.

Jason and Kelly Wright, applicants and owners, civil engineering and construction services agency for conditional use permit to construct a general contractor warehouse with outside storage.

The applicant also seeks approval of an alternative parking surface.

The property is located at 1713 Pocket Road in the Southern Chesapeake planning area.

The planning commission recommends approval with the stipulations listed in the official agenda.

Mr.

McNamey, as proposed, the as stipulated, the proposed use meets the intent and the performance standards of the Fentress Airfield Overlay District, and with appropriate stipulations and mitigation measures will be compatible with the surrounding rural properties.

Staff therefore recommends approval with stipulations, Dave, February 23rd, 2026.

And do we have uh any speakers on this?

We have three that signed up.

The first is Sam Baracki, the agent speaking in support.

Mayor West, member of council and staff, good evening.

My name is Sam Boracki.

My my address is 5267 Greenish Road in Virginia Beach.

I am here tonight regarding a request for conditional use permit to operate a contractor yard on a property located at 1713 Pocket Road within the Fentress overlay district.

My client, Jason and Kelly Wright, are the owner of a utility company and intend to use this site for to uh as a yard to support their business operation.

They have taken the time to meet with the neighboring property owners, and I am pleased to report none of has expressed concern with the proposed use.

In addition, the impact of this project on public facility is minimal.

The total traffic generated is expected to be fewer than ten trips per day.

They're gonna use this as just a staging yard.

They come in in the morning, park their car, pick up the truck, and go to work, then bring it back and leave.

The application has gone through review.

The Navy evaluated the repos the proposed use and issued approval.

Staff has recommended approval.

Planning commission also voted in favor of this project.

Based on these findings and lack of opposition, I am here tonight to respectfully request your yes vote for this project.

And thank you for your time.

I'll stand by to answer in questions.

Thank you, sir.

Jason Wright for questions only.

And Kelly Wright for questions only.

Motion, please.

Move on to the term second.

Thank you.

Any discussion, Ms.

Nolan?

No discussion.

No.

No.

No discussion.

Anyone else?

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

Motion to approve PLNU's 2025-056 with stipulations and the alternative parking service as presented as a doctor by an A-0 vote.

Any council members have unfinished business they'd like to bring up at this time.

Moving no new business.

Very good.

Thank you.

Dr.

Ward?

And it's kind of old.

I just wanted but what we did was new.

I just want to come in Bishop Ken Brown and Pastor LJ Brown of the Mount who allowed us to present the proclamation for naming uh Western Branch Park or Recreation Director Claire Chisholm and it asked you.

Because she was creatism and she was seven for me.

But uh the proclamation was so well received.

Uh she's just been a phenomenal uh member of our church and active she and her husband.

And I'm just thankful that uh they allowed us to do that.

I think he's been working on it for a while.

And we had probably about 1,500 people there because the church was filled for the second service, and that was a good idea to have it the second service because it might have went over.

But everybody was really appreciative.

And that's certainly was.

Very good.

Thank you for sharing that.

Seeing no additional new business, I'd like to ask our city attorney to provide the language for a closed meeting topic.

A motion to conduct a closed meeting to discuss the acquisition and conveyance of certain real properties located in the Great Bridge Planning Area, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body as permitted by Section 2.2-3711A3 of the Code of Virginia.

Thank you.

Motion please will approval.

Thank you.

Dr.

Ward, Mr.

Smith.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Madam Clerk.

Motion to conduct a closed meeting is adopted by an 8-0 vote.

It's now 739.

Council will convene and close meeting.

I was going to tell you what I was saying.

They jumped the done.

Yeah, let's put it this way this one.

We don't do this.

That's exactly right.

You're exactly right.

No doubt about it.

We do and normally it's a PPA, which is a project agreement.

We cannot do anything in this Congress.

And I was in the belt of the contract, so I got me done.

Yeah.

So the first proof will be done momentarily.

Oh, really?

No.

Oh, yeah.

A motion is certified that to the best of each member's knowledge, only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements were discussed.

Thank you.

We have one more.

Yes.

Okay.

Motion to conduct a closed meeting on Tuesday, April 28th at 4 p.m.

in Chesapeake City Hall to discuss, consider, interview prospective candidates for appointment to city boards, commissions, and authorities for the purposes of considering candidates for the Chesapeake Bicycle and Trails Advisory Committee, the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, the Human Services Advisory Board, the National Natural Event Mitigation Advisory Committee, the Transportation District Commission of Hampton Roads.

All is permitted by Section 2.2-3711A1 of the Code of Virginia.

Motion, please.

Move approval.

Thank you, Mr.

Whitaker, Dr.

Ward.

Please prepare to vote.

Please vote and record.

Motion to hold a closed meeting on April the 28th at 4 o'clock is adopted by an 8-0 vote.

Council Member Smith, would you please do our benediction?

Father, we thank you for allowing us to have another successful meeting.

We ask that you continue to look over the citizens of our city and of our of our nation.

Let us reach our homes safely this evening as we look forward to the next time that we meet.

In Jesus' name we pray.

Amen.